Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Presentation Resources

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Digital Resources for Learning

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

  • 1645 Accesses

Abstract

A presentation resource is a digital media for education designed to explicitly present certain declarative knowledge (facts and information) with the intention for learners to remember, understand and reproduce that content as it was originally presented. Underlining assumption is that learning occurs by transfer of information, that is, by explicit teaching and presentation of content designed, arranged and presented for learners to internalize.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alesandrini, R. L. (1984). Pictures and adult learning. Instructional Science, 13, 63–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alessi, S. M., & Trollip, S. R. (1995). Computer-based instruction: methods and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boshuizen, P. A., & Hermina, J. M. (1998). Problem solving with multiple representations by multiple and single agents: An analysis of the issues involved. In A. Van Someren (Ed.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 137–151). Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, D. (2005). Learning object: An interactive representation and a mediating tool in a learning activity. Educational Media International, 42(4), 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cisco Systems. (2001). Reusable learning object strategy: Designing information and learning objects through concept, fact, procedure, process, and principle template. San Jose, CA: Cisco Systems Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clifford, R. (2002, August). Adding a pedagogical dimension to SCORM [Digital Audio Recording]. Oral presentation at the Online Instruction for 21st Century: Connecting Instructional Design to International Standards for Content Reusability, Brigham Young University, Rexburg, Idaho. Retrieved from http://zola.byu.edu/id2scorm/

  • Cochrane, T. (2005). Interactive QuickTime: Developing and evaluating multimedia learning objects to enhance both face-to-face and distance e-learning environments. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1(1), 33–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dale, E. (1946). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York, NY: The Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davydov, V. V. (1999). The content and unsolved problems of activity theory. In Y. Engerström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 39–52). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, T. D., Ainsworth, S., Dobson, M., Hulst, A., Levonen, J., Reimann, P., et al. (1998). Acquiring knowledge in science and mathematics: The use of multiple representations in technology based learning environments. In A. Van Someren (Ed.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 9–40). Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, R. S., & Enomoth, P. A. (1983). Pictorial organization in prose learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8, 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, W., & Carey, L. M. (1978, 1985, 1990, 1996). The systematic design of instruction. Glenview, IL: Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • E-learning Competency Center. (2003). Explanation on learning objects. Retrieved from http://www.ecc.org.sg/loc/ecplain.htm

  • Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-konsultit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, A. (1999). Web visualization for teachers. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, August 8, B8. Retrieved from http://fraser.cc/

  • Friesen, N. (2003). Three objections to learning objects. Retrieved from http://www.learningspaces.org/n/papers/objections.html

  • Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J., & Wager, W. W. (1992). Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, A. (2000). Model-centered instruction: Beyond simulation. Retrieved from http://www.gwu.edu/~lto/gibbons.html

  • Hedegaard, M., & Lompscher, J. (Eds.). (1999). Learning activity and development. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • IEEE. (2001). WG12: Learning object metadata. Retrieved from http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12/

  • Imran, H., Belghis-Zadeh, M., Chang, T. W., & Graf, S. (2016). PLORS: A personalized learning object recommender system. Vietnam Journal of Computer Science, 3(1), 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IMS Global Learning Consortium. (2002). Learning resource meta-data specification. Retrieved from http://www.imsglobal.org/metadata/

  • Jonassen, D. (Ed.). (1988). Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D., & Churchill, D (2004). Is there learning orientation in learning objects? International Journal of E-learning, 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, H. D., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, W. H., & Lentz, R. (1982). Effects of text illustrations: A review of research. Educational Communication and Technology, 30, 195–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, J. R., & Berry, J. K. (1980). Children’s learning of all the news that’s fit to picture. Educational Communication and Technology, 28, 177–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lukasiak, J., Agostinho, S., Bennet, S., Harper, B., Lockyer, L., & Powley, B. (2005). Learning objects and learning designs: An integrated system for reusable, adaptive and sharable learning content. Research in Learning Technology, 13(2), 151–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning & Instruction, 13, 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGreal, R. (2004). Learning objects: A practical definition. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(9), 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • MERLOT. (n.d.). Learning material types. Retrieved from http://info.merlot.org/merlothelp/merlot_collection.htm#Learning_Material_Types

  • Merrill, M. D. (2000). Knowledge objects and mental models. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects. Retrieved from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/merrill.doc

  • Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. The Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeves, T. (1998). Evaluating what really matters in computer-based education. Retrieved from http://eduworks.com/Documents/Workshops/EdMedia1998/docs/reeves.html

  • Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shallert, D. L. (1980). The role of illustrations in reading comprehension. In R. Spiro, B. Bruce, & W. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 503–524). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. (1997). Interactivity: A forgotten art? Retrieved from http://intro.base.org/docs/interact/

  • Spector, M. J. (1995). Integrating and humanizing the process of automating instructional design. In R. D. Tennyson & A. E. Barron (Eds.), Automating instructional design: Computer-based development and delivery tools. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tubelo, R. A., Branco, V. L. C., Dahmer, A., Samuel, S. M. W., & Collares, F. M. (2016). The influence of a learning object with virtual simulation for dentistry: A randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 85(1), 68–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. (1997). Visual explanations. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. (2001). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press LLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Someren, A. (Ed.). (1998). Learning with multiple representations. Kidlington, Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Someren, A., Boshuizen, P. A., de Jong, T., & Reimann, P. (1998). Introduction. In A. Van Someren (Ed.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 1–5). Kidlington, Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, R. (2001). Visual design for instructional content. Retrieved from http://www.elearningpost.com/articles/archives/visual_design_for_instructional_content_part_i

  • Von Glassersfeld, E. (1997). Piaget’s legacy: Cognition as adaptive activity. Retrieved from http://www.umass.edu/srri/vonGlasersfeld/onlinePapers/html/245.html

  • Vygotsky, S. L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harward University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y. (1984). Designing computer games to help students understand Newton’s laws of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 69–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D., & Edwards, E. (2002). Online self-organizing social systems: The decentralized future of online learning. Retrieved from http://wiley.ed.usu.edu/docs/ososs.pdf

  • Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects. Retrieved from http://reusability.org/read/chapters/wiley.doc

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Information and Technology Studies, Faculty of Education, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

    Daniel Churchill

Authors
  1. Daniel Churchill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Churchill .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Churchill, D. (2017). Presentation Resources. In: Digital Resources for Learning. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3776-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3776-4_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-10-3775-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-10-3776-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation